Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Reports: More than 530,000 mail ballots rejected during primaries

mail ballots sorting

An election worker sorts ballots following the Washington state primary in August.

Jason Redmond/Getty Images

A pair of major media outlets independently reported over the weekend that states have collectively rejected at least 530,000 mail-in ballots during the 2020 primaries.

On Saturday, NPR reported that at least 550,000 mail-in votes were rejected across 30 states that have made the data available. In most cases, ballots were denied because of problems with signatures or the ballots arrived late. The next day, The Washington Post reported on 534,000 rejected ballots in 23 states. Both reports noted that their counts are sure to be well below the actual totals because some states and local jurisdictions have not made the data available to the public.

The data, coupled with ongoing state-level fights over ballot access, indicates a messy Election Day.


The Covid-19 pandemic has led to a massive increase in voting by mail in 2020 as well as election staffing shortages. Add in mail delays, and it was already clear that ballot counting will not be complete on Nov. 3. Legal battles are being waged across the country over election system changes that in most states are designed to make it easier to vote amid the health crisis.

President Trump has been baselessly claiming that mail-in voting is a breeding ground for election fraud, and his campaign has taken legal action in a number of states. The courtroom battles are sure to continue after Election Day, as the Republican and Democratic parties can be expected to contest ballot counts in any tight race. For example, in Pennsylvania — which President Trump won by just 44,000 votes in 2016, 37,000 ballots were tossed in the June primary, according to NPR.

Read the full reports from NPR and the Post.

Read More

Hand placing VOTE sticker on shirt

Hand placing VOTE sticker on shirt

Photo provided

The Latino Vote Keeps Changing. Why Do We Keep Calling It a Realignment?

After the 2024 presidential election, the headlines suggested that Latino voters were moving toward the Republican Party. Donald Trump’s gains were interpreted as evidence of a possible political realignment, particularly among working-class Latino voters and younger men.

Two years later, the story has reversed. Latino voters, we are told, are returning to the Democrats.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Donald Trump and Stephen Miller

President Donald Trump departs a roundtable discussion on cybercrime with White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller (R) in the East Room of the White House on October 21, 2026, in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Trump’s Elevation of Stephen Miller Proves His Promise to Work With Democrats Is a Farce

In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday’s sweeping midterm election losses, a chastened President Donald Trump struck an unusually conciliatory tone, signaling a willingness to work with Democrats. But the spirit of bipartisanship proved fleeting.

By forcing out Susie Wiles and elevating Stephen Miller to White House Chief of Staff, Trump has delivered a definitive, defiant message to the American electorate: the era of uncompromising grievance and division isn't over—it is being supercharged.

Keep ReadingShow less
economics graph on blackboard

economics graph on blackboard

Getty Images

What Post-1971 Supply-side Economics Has Done to Veterans

Post-1971 supply-side economics—often referred to as "trickle-down economics" or "Reaganomics” fundamentally transformed the relationship between the federal government and military veterans. The year 1971 marked the end of the Bretton Woods system, the closing of the gold window, and a pivot toward neoliberal economic frameworks that prioritized deregulation, sweeping tax cuts, and aggressive federal deficit reduction via domestic spending cuts.

For veterans, who had previously benefited from the expansive, New Deal-style social investments of the original G.I. Bill, this macroeconomic paradigm shift led to four distinct structural consequences:

Keep ReadingShow less
Bank sign
The bank of ornate classical columns and facade
Photo by Leo_Visions on Unsplash

A Bank Account Should Not Come with a Political Litmus Test

The ongoing appetite for "debanking"—pressuring financial institutions to cut off customers because of who they are, what they believe, or with whom they associate—should concern everyone. Why? Because in the end, anyone can become an easy target.

One pressure point has been protests against private banks whose customers are companies who build or operate immigration detention facilities under contracts with the Trump administration. The Boston area saw such protests earlier this year, and there have been others.

Keep ReadingShow less